Do we want the US to financially support NATO?

Don’t allow views of DT to colour views of the US.

The US did not allow itself to be drawn into WW2. After the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbour Hitler declared war on the US (thereby fulfilling a mutual assistance treaty obligation to the Japanese).

The US has effectuvely over-funded NATO for many years while most European members have failed to pay their share. Several US Presidents have complained about this but only Mr Trump has forced the Europeans to pay up. If NATO is to continue all the member states should pay their fair share.

Given that the US is joint 6th in the list of defence spending by % of GDP, I don't think you can say they are over-funding NATO.

There's a wealth of information in that link I posted. When it comes to spending per capita Norway easily exceeds the USA figure. Don't forget the USA defence spending figures are the total for its Pacific and Atlantic sides, Europe only has the Atlantic side.

Oreo

Don’t forget the US allowed itself to be drawn into WW2 and helped out then in Europe.
After the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbour it could have confined itself to war with Japan.

They'd have found that difficult, given that it was Hitler who declared war on the USA after Pearl Harbour, which sort of involved the USA in the war in Europe wether they wanted it or not.

valdavi

Oreo

Don’t forget the US allowed itself to be drawn into WW2 and helped out then in Europe.
After the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbour it could have confined itself to war with Japan.

They'd have found that difficult, given that it was Hitler who declared war on the USA after Pearl Harbour, which sort of involved the USA in the war in Europe wether they wanted it or not.

They certainly did not rush in to help before that date, 11th December, 1941, and maintained their neutrality until then.

Allira

valdavi

Oreo

Don’t forget the US allowed itself to be drawn into WW2 and helped out then in Europe.
After the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbour it could have confined itself to war with Japan.

They'd have found that difficult, given that it was Hitler who declared war on the USA after Pearl Harbour, which sort of involved the USA in the war in Europe wether they wanted it or not.

They certainly did not rush in to help before that date, 11th December, 1941, and maintained their neutrality until then.

No they didn't rush in hence they have different dates for WW2 and WW1.......
Sometimes I think people forget that the other North American country Canada voluntarily voted in their parliament to enter WW2 only 7 days after the UK. There are allies and then there are allies..........

I remember what people used to say about the Americans stationed in the UK!

We do not have to support Trump’s illegal war!

Allira

I remember what people used to say about the Americans stationed in the UK!

I wasn't alive during WW2 but I've heard most of 'the sayings' I think and would probably have agreed with the majority 🤣🤣

Grantanow

The US has effectuvely over-funded NATO for many years while most European members have failed to pay their share. Several US Presidents have complained about this but only Mr Trump has forced the Europeans to pay up. If NATO is to continue all the member states should pay their fair share.

most european members have failed to pay their share
Wrong. There are 27 countries in the eu. 9 members have failed to pay their share.
I find that number to be a third of members, not most

It’s now become obvious that far too many people have sucked up Trumps rhetoric Re other members contribution. Just keep repeating the lies and they will believe it. This site has certainly proved how true that is.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckg3082d3ero

In cash terms, the US is by far the biggest spender on defence in Nato, spending $935bn (£686bn) in 2024, which was 3.2% of its GDP and nearly double the defence spending of the rest of Nato put together. That might qualify as over-funding as it is not clear how the US benefits from NATO in comparison with the European members.

Grantanow

The US has effectuvely over-funded NATO for many years while most European members have failed to pay their share. Several US Presidents have complained about this but only Mr Trump has forced the Europeans to pay up. If NATO is to continue all the member states should pay their fair share.

Before we start making statements if this kind, it’s really important to understand the why and how NATO is funded and understand that the funding splits have been agreed amongst all members, including the USA.

www.nato.int/en/what-we-do/introduction-to-nato/funding-nato

I think you're wasting your time. Cossy. It's been explained several times to no avail.

The USA benefit from NATO in many ways

www.belfercenter.org/research-analysis/nato-vital-us-national-security

www.gmfus.org/news/nato-strength-unity

The USA has generated millions of $$$$ from arms sales to NATO allies and it’s certainly not a case of the USA not getting anything out of NATO, they have bases in most members countries and due to the size and location of the US they could be vulnerable.

Trump, yet again, has shown he has zero clue about the funding and purpose of NATO, in his utter arrogance he claims the US has over paid for decades, however every single one of his predecessors were happy with the funding algorithm - his ignorance and ego continually astound me!

MaizieD

I think you're wasting your time. Cossy. It's been explained several times to no avail.

☹️☹️

Never say die 🤣🤣🤣🤣

Allira

valdavi

Oreo

Don’t forget the US allowed itself to be drawn into WW2 and helped out then in Europe.
After the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbour it could have confined itself to war with Japan.

They'd have found that difficult, given that it was Hitler who declared war on the USA after Pearl Harbour, which sort of involved the USA in the war in Europe wether they wanted it or not.

They certainly did not rush in to help before that date, 11th December, 1941, and maintained their neutrality until then.

They came into the war after Pearl Harbour its true, but once in the war their help was invaluable and turned a corner for us.
Hitler may have had to declare war on the US because of its treaty with Japan but Germany couldn’t do anything to the US, too far away and would have stretched its resources too far.
It had to confine itself to trying to kill American troops in Europe.
I really think that today’s dislike of the US and Trump in particular is causing people to diss anything they did in the past.
We wouldn’t have won the last war without them.

Rosie51

Allira

I remember what people used to say about the Americans stationed in the UK!

I wasn't alive during WW2 but I've heard most of 'the sayings' I think and would probably have agreed with the majority 🤣🤣

You do realise there was envy that caused those sayings? The US troops here seemed to be better looking, taller, and had more money and goods than any of the locals.Also had a more relaxed and friendly demeanour!😄

I don’t think any of us will forget when the USA was a true ally, they helped us to “win the war” and ten loaned us the money to help us to restore and rebuild our country, which we repaid in full.

However, this doesn’t give Trump the right to behave as he does, to rewrite history and to talk absolute baloney most of the time.

It’s so hard to separate Trump and his cronies from the rest of the good people of the US, because his actions have been so far reaching and affect so many.

We had/have many allies, none behaving like Trump. He’s an egotistical bully who actually hasn’t achieved much of what he’s promised his own citizens, and is surrounded by sycophantic greedy morons who are just as bad as him.

Bring on elections, I’m not bothered who gets in, so long as Trump and his crew are removed and we, in the UK, can start meaningful open honest and sensible discussions around reinstating our political and trade relationships.

Btw, those who cheer Trump on and state his clever and a great businessman might do well to remember his father and grandfather were the ones who built up the business empires and would no doubt be turning in their graves!

Oreo

That’s hilarious and not strictly true.

Most of our own males, who were just as “good looking and tall” (we were not a nation of ugly dwarfs 🤣🤣🤣,) were away fighting, so of course some women were drawn to these US soldiers, who looked dapper in their uniforms, spoke differently and had access to some things rationed in the UK.

Some of these women were married, so of course that caused resentment and anger, rather than envy.

Imagine you were away at war, or your son or brother were, and returned to find your wife sleeping with an American serviceman? I doubt you’d be “envious”

It may be hard for some to ‘ separate Trump and his cronies from the rest of the people in the US’ you say Cossy but it’s possible for any thinking person to do.
The election in the US is still some way off and I am certainly bothered who gets in.
It won’t be Trump obviously but could easily be another Republican unless the Democrats come up with a better candidate than in the last few years.

Cossy it’s what I have read, and the looks and height of Americans were due to a lifetime of much better food than here in the UK.So not hilarious at all, just factual.They also were better paid and with smarter uniforms and wore shoes not ugly boots.
Naturally their accents helped.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

Their teeth were better too!😄

Bit passive/ aggressive there Cossy
If a person, on GN or not, cannot separate the two things then they are definitely not thinking people.